Re: The Status page of Debian-Live is cryptic
On 30/05/11 04:53 PM, shirish शिरीष wrote:
> It is cryptic both for uninformed casual user as well as a casual
> debian user, except for the hardened/enthusiast debian-user wouldn't
> know how to make sense of it.
I'm confused why you skipped our documentation and other parts of the
site, and just went straight for the Status page, a page with almost
nothing on it, to learn everything about the project and how to use the
software we make. That's just ... well, rather baffling. This page is
only meant to keep developers of live systems using our tools up to date
with what we're working on as a project, nothing more.
> While I cannot imagine all the user
> stories or test-cases couple of the most common ones come to mind :-
>
> a. I want to use a live-CD to check out Debian, which one should I use ?
And you would use "Status" for that, and not "Releases"? If you want to
use a live CD to check out Debian, I think the obvious answer is "use
the latest release".
> b. I want to use the Live-CD as a rescue CD, which one should I go for ?
Again, "Status" for this? The download area indicates there's a rescue
flavor. That would be an obvious choice.
> Now, apparently or shallowy , it seems the answers to both the
> questions may be/might be live-build2.x . If my assumption is correct,
> then why isn't it given as a recommendation for a new user .
Since live-build 2.x is what's in Debian Stable, that is implicitly
recommended, since Testing/Unstable are not for casual end-users, but
only for "hardened/enthusiast" users, as you characterize them.
> Lastly, the workaround given as the link
> http://lists.debian.org/debian-live/2011/05/msg00144.html should
> either have preceeded or have instructions before, during or after
> downloading the live-build how to add that repo. because without a
> functioning stable kernel (with aufs) things cannot go far.
If you using Testing or Unstable, you should be aware that not
everything works all of the time. People doing this *are* hardcore
users, and should therefore not be confused when they read terse status
updates linking to bug#s.
Ben
Reply to: